The Myth of being contenders year after year for an extended period of time.

[nwfisch]

Not surprising the dude who likes to watch grown men on steroids in tights roll around with each other and who chose a picture straight from the FBI's most wanted pedophile list as his avatar is completely ignorant to the facts that it is very hard to consistently field a competitive team year in and year out.

:andruw:

 

[mountsalami]

It's funny fisch because it definitely couldn't be far from the truth.

 

[patg006]

I don't think anyone is expecting Epstein to build the Yankees, but if he built say even the Giants, Cardinals, Braves, or Red Sox string of 20 years(which the Cubs will have the resources to do)...I think most fans would be pretty satisfied.

Your research logic and reasoning all pretty much suck.

:enough:

 

[KBisBack!]

Comparing them to the Rays at the end is rather stupid as well. When the Cubs talent develops they will have the market resources to resign them. The Rays didn't, and don't.

Yawn.

If you actually knew what you were talking about for a change, which you don't, you would know that many Cub fans have said they should be modeled after the Rays because of the Rays success with the farm system.

So it was actually a very good comparison. The only thing stupid was for someone who doesn't know what they are talking about to run their mouth.

I don't think anyone is expecting Epstein to build the Yankees, but if he built say even the Giants, Cardinals, Braves, or Red Sox string of 20 years(which the Cubs will have the resources to do)...I think most fans would be pretty satisfied.

Really??? You don't say.

No shit Captain Obvious, Sherlock Holmes.

The point of providing all those facts, which was obviously lost on you, was how few teams were able to have even the level of success of the Braves, Cards, Giants or Red Sox and even then it was far less then the long term contender status idiots like yourself believe are coming for the Cubs because they are throwing away a couple seasons with Theo at the helm.

 

[Jntg4]

Yawn.

If you actually knew what you were talking about for a change, which you don't, you would know that many Cub fans have said they should be modeled after the Rays because of the Rays success with the farm system.

So it was actually a very good comparison. The only thing stupid was for someone who doesn't know what they are talking about to run their mouth.



Really??? You don't say.

No shit Captain Obvious, Sherlock Holmes.

The point of providing all those facts, which was obviously lost on you, was how few teams were able to have even the level of success of the Braves, Cards, Giants or Red Sox and even then it was far less then the long term contender status idiots like yourself believe are coming for the Cubs because they are throwing away a couple seasons with Theo at the helm.

The goal stated is to build a team that will make the playoffs year-in and year-out, which probably won't happen. However, if we can be over .500 about 8 years out of ten and make the playoffs about four years out of ten, that would still be satisfying enough of a job, and then it will be up to the players to decide if there will be a championship thrown in there in four chances. Of course, it may not turn out that way, but I'd definitely call that consistent contending even if it doesn't meet the requirements you set in this thread.

 

[mountsalami]

The goal stated is to build a team that will make the playoffs year-in and year-out, which probably won't happen. However, if we can be over .500 about 8 years out of ten and make the playoffs about four years out of ten, that would still be satisfying enough of a job, and then it will be up to the players to decide if there will be a championship thrown in there in four chances. Of course, it may not turn out that way, but I'd definitely call that consistent contending even if it doesn't meet the requirements you set in this thread.

At this rate. We won't be .500 in eight years.

 

[Jntg4]

At this rate. We won't be .500 in eight years.

Well this thread is about teams being competitive on an annual basis being a myth, and something only select teams can do, I'm questioning his methods in deciding what is contending and what isn't from year to year.

And key phrase, "at this rate".

 

[KBisBack!]

Well this thread is about teams being competitive on an annual basis being a myth, and something only select teams can do, I'm questioning his methods in deciding what is contending and what isn't from year to year.

How can you be questioning my methods??

I explained EXACTLY how I choose my method of 90's win as contending year to year.

Isn't it you who said the following??

Don't give a **** if it is 80 or 100 losses because neither makes playoffs.

What do those extra 20 wins get you?

90 vs. 80 matters, 80 vs. 100 does not, it amounts to the same thing.

Yep.

So you say one thing and now say almost the opposite here in your rush to fill your diapers and argue with anything I have said.

You say that you want the Cubs to make the playoffs in 4 out of every 10 years, well I obviously have to do the math for you here, that is 8 playoffs appearances over 20 years. 1 more playoff appearance than my example showing that 5 teams made the playoffs 7 years or more but somehow you want to question my one fewer playoff appearance??

You say that 80 losses doesn't matter cause it doesn't get you in the playoffs but yet here you say that being a .500 team 80% of the time is a good thing.

FYI, only the Yankees, Braves, Red Sox and surprisingly the Dodgers are the only teams to be over .500 for 16 out of the last 20 years.

But go ahead and whine about how unfair that is now.

 

[AmericanFlyer1]

You tell me. I'm sure you've found ways of "limbering up" after your Geritol and tomato juice.

When you actually start to make sense, if possible, I can only assume that your device of communication has something to do with your ass.

That is fucking hilarious!!!!

 

[AmericanFlyer1]

There is a simple comparison that the brain trust should be able to relate to....

Teams like the Yankees, Red Sox, Braves, and Cardinals would never just throw away a few seasons to re-build. Their personnel people realize that their fans want winners and they realize they were given the jobs they have because they want to win.

They certainly don't tank seasons or purposely throw away seasons under the guise of "re-building".

After the crap year Boston had two years ago....don't think they weren't getting ready to fire Theo. There was huge talk about it and that is probably why he jumped at this job. I know many have short memories but there weren't too many RSox fans yelling and screaming because he left. If memory serves, they were happy to get rid of him.

Fast forward to now and we have a entire management team of losers, managing a losing team, and feeding loser fans a bunch of loser talk in the promise of not being losers in the future.

Got a feeling they will continue to be losers.....

Funny, when management don't mind losing; it's funny what the results are. Especially when you compare that to GM's and management of other teams that don't except losers and demand winning. Funny how they seem to win a great deal and the losers seem to lose a great deal.

Of course, that is far too much "philosophy" for the brain trust here. Too bad it's reality though.

 

[Jntg4]

How can you be questioning my methods??

I explained EXACTLY how I choose my method of 90's win as contending year to year.

Isn't it you who said the following??



Yep.

So you say one thing and now say almost the opposite here in your rush to fill your diapers and argue with anything I have said.

You say that you want the Cubs to make the playoffs in 4 out of every 10 years, well I obviously have to do the math for you here, that is 8 playoffs appearances over 20 years. 1 more playoff appearance than my example showing that 5 teams made the playoffs 7 years or more but somehow you want to question my one fewer playoff appearance??

You say that 80 losses doesn't matter cause it doesn't get you in the playoffs but yet here you say that being a .500 team 80% of the time is a good thing.

FYI, only the Yankees, Braves, Red Sox and surprisingly the Dodgers are the only teams to be over .500 for 16 out of the last 20 years.

But go ahead and whine about how unfair that is now.

I know you explained your methods, I disagree with how you went about them.

And no that is not different. Completely unrelated, one was to point out that neither comes with the same results in a single season, the other was a statement on consistently being above that mark allows for a team to be able to qualify for the playoffs more often. This doesn't have to last 20 years either, even that 10 year window provides some pretty good opportunity. But of course, taking things obviously meant in different contexts as to duration fits an aenda you like to mention in every post, right?

 

[CSF77]

Few things here.

NYY have been a top performer due to the resource put into the team. They also draft and develop well. They also trade out those resources for proven talent vs hoping something works.

Phi is now a major player and has used resource to acquire talent.
Bost same thing until they had to remove payroll.
Another big market player: LLA
Dodgers have upped their game at the end of last year.
Tigers, Rangers SFG, STL all have over 100 mil payrolls.

Cubs could up the numbers as they are #4 resource in baseball.

They could have done a better job of putting a contender while developing a farm. The farm is going to take years to develop with their own picks. Might as well win games in the mean time.


This year:
Yanks: 232m, LAD 223M, Phi 170M, Bos 152M, Det 145M, SFG 140M, LAA 128M, TBJ 127 M CWS 120M, STL 116M,

Top 10.

Another funny thing:

W.Sox only broke 2mil last year and they pumped out a 120 mil payroll...Cubs 3 mil and 104 M payroll.

1mil more fans and 16 mil less payroll.

And tell me who is making more profit? Same city same rules.......

 

[Franko725]

Cubs could be a lot higher in payroll given the money they bring in. But, the Ricketts' family does not want to spend more than that right now. Somehow some people on here blame Theo and Co. for Ricketts being cheap.

 

[KBisBack!]

I know you explained your methods, I disagree with how you went about them.

Like I said.

You are basically disagreeing with yourself in order to fill your diapers and argue with me.

Thanks!

 

[Jntg4]

Like I said.

You are basically disagreeing with yourself in order to fill your diapers and argue with me.

Thanks!

Yes, you caught me, but it's only because I'm insanely jealous of your intellect and ability to find other people's agendas while not having one yourself.

 

[patg006]

Yes, you caught me, but it's only because I'm insanely jealous of your intellect and ability to find other people's agendas while not having one yourself.

Didnt know it was an agenda to want your favorite baseball team to do whatever it takes to win a world series after having not won one in 105 years.......

But of course, defending an intentional shit creek trip by command central to rationalize only one facet of the team has no agenda at all.

My apologies

:fap:

 

[KBisBack!]

Didnt know it was an agenda to want your favorite baseball team to do whatever it takes to win a world series after having not won one in 105 years......

:fap:

I know.

What a bad person I am.

Maybe someday I will grow up and be a special person who will enjoy 100 loss seasons because the team has told me they are on the way to winning the World Series at some undetermined date in the future.

pat, you would do well yourself to follow the shining example set by jntg4

 

[Jntg4]

I know.

What a bad person I am.

Maybe someday I will grow up and be a special person who will enjoy 100 loss seasons because the team has told me they are on the way to winning the World Series at some undetermined date in the future.

pat, you would do well yourself to follow the shining example set by jntg4

No really though, I'm extremely jealous though, I would be privileged to ever even be pissed upon by the great KB and all his great knowledge and logic.

 

[nwfisch]

Didnt know it was an agenda to want your favorite baseball team to do whatever it takes to win a world series after having not won one in 105 years.......

But of course, defending an intentional shit creek trip by command central to rationalize only one facet of the team has no agenda at all.

My apologies

:fap:

:andruw:

 

[KBisBack!]

No really though, I'm extremely jealous though, I would be privileged to ever even be pissed upon by the great KB and all his great knowledge and logic.

It could only make you smarter.